blog search (b.s.) anachronistic*
(search: 4th dunn)
(b.s.) a. Anachronistic
Reasoning?, b. Faux
Campaign, c. FAUX
NEWS!, (e.), f. Clause
Wits (3.0)?, (g)host
Busters, h. Roar
Shack, i. A
Tail of Caution, ( j. ), k. ether
note, l. F'n
P[!] m. War'n
Buffet Rule , n. By
Polar , o. From
17A to 37B, p. Killing
Fields of Dreams, q. Future
Bubble? , (r.).
*anomaly knot
(_) Rat
Races Van Mices?, The
LESS THAN pentagonal file:, Bury
the lede?, Too
Random...,
[ Picture Theory: 1. The
Curve or Nuance Thing, 2. For
Words!, (3.), 4. GOP
Plan to Hurt Economy
Speaking of timing [!] Philosophy Now links may be free for limited time. Democracy is not.
On meaning. / War
On/Or Terrorism ? , MoveOn , Decider
Stays Course., FAST
REVERSE or BACKTRACK BEFORE FAST TRACK , ]
Showing posts sorted by relevance for query anachronistic. Sort by date Show all posts
Showing posts sorted by relevance for query anachronistic. Sort by date Show all posts
Thursday, October 02, 2014
Thursday, July 25, 2002
(x) July 25th, 2012
First task(see reminder*): footnote b.s. (blog search)
1. Mitt's BO*Son
2. Bring It On!
"for goodness sake" " we are the RNC" on AM?
[bleepin'(or in-eFf-able) non-anachronistic tan(not so)gents]
3. Who Let the Dogs Out?
woof woof**
4. Clinton(Bill) is full of B.S.
* anachronism to be noted
[post dated 7-25-12 (page x)]
[7-19-12 Anachronistic Caution * ! ]
(apologies for the inserts, for Pete sake{a-f}.)
** {a-g} second apologies
[Not 2 pun on 4 moo lahs but... for goodness sake, won heckuva hint.]
1. Mitt's BO*Son
2. Bring It On!
"for goodness sake" " we are the RNC" on AM?
[bleepin'(or in-eFf-able) non-anachronistic tan(not so)gents]
3. Who Let the Dogs Out?
woof woof**
4. Clinton(Bill) is full of B.S.
* anachronism to be noted
[post dated 7-25-12 (page x)]
[7-19-12 Anachronistic Caution * ! ]
(apologies for the inserts, for Pete sake{a-f}.)
** {a-g} second apologies
[Not 2 pun on 4 moo lahs but... for goodness sake, won heckuva hint.]
Tuesday, March 06, 2012
Anachronistic Reasoning?
Rational Actors?
The X-Factor?
The dilemma*** of dealing with irrational actors, seems to argue that the reason for not allowing Iran to get nuclear weapons, is the same reason for supporting the Republicans for leadership: Only irrational actors can deal with irrational actors.**
Ironically it seems that it is the same reason for nuclear proliferation. Nuclear arms are needed to prevent the will of an enemy from being forced on one's homeland. Hence the irrational* also enforces the rationale that Iran needs nuclear arms for rational reasons.
[Note: it was not my original intent to post so much comment. A reading of the asterisks in order,(* through ***) may help the flow of reasoning, such as it is. (i.e. get to *** before reading asterisks.)]
The dilemma*** of dealing with irrational actors, seems to argue that the reason for not allowing Iran to get nuclear weapons, is the same reason for supporting the Republicans for leadership: Only irrational actors can deal with irrational actors.**
Ironically it seems that it is the same reason for nuclear proliferation. Nuclear arms are needed to prevent the will of an enemy from being forced on one's homeland. Hence the irrational* also enforces the rationale that Iran needs nuclear arms for rational reasons.
This is not to argue for nuclear proliferation or disarmament, only to expose the paradox of expecting forces to be irrational, except when it is one's own. And this certainly does not argue for Republican leadership, at least as it expects to enforce their rational behavior on irrational bases. Such rationale is only loose talk or worse, intentional escalation of world tensions, and certainly not incentive for nuclear non-proliferation, global understanding or economic progress.
* not so irrational in the foundations here: as it is irrational to claim that Iran is irrational as a rational for preventing their nuclear capabilities. It is rational just attempting to rationalize behavior despite potential irrationality of the players.
**dualing ironies or double down dueling[!]
[or just dualing down?]
*** this paradox is also rational
This piece is based on a reading of the Chomsky and Pillar pieces.(in light of the "Actors" clip) But not before a re-reading of the complete Kroenig piece in a paper bound edition of Foreign Affairs, not fully available here. I had not yet stumbled on these articles, which may shine more light on the exorcise here.[!] From the former of the last two:
Matthew Kroenig's argument for preventive military action to combat Tehran's nuclear program -- "Time to Attack Iran" (January/February 2012) -- suffers from three problems. First, its view of Iranian leaders' risk calculations is self-contradictory. Second, it misreads nuclear history. And third, it underestimates the United States' ability to contain a nuclear Iran. When these problems are addressed, it is clear that, contrary to what Kroenig contends, attacking Iran is not "the least bad option."
--
Kroenig's inconsistency is clear: If Iranian leaders are as reckless as he seems to believe, a preventive strike would likely escalate to a full-blown war. If they are not, then there is no reason to think that a nuclear Iran would be uncontainable.
[No Fluke? Yeah Right! ...and more Breaking Presidential Press Conference ! And ABC Fact Check is not Fact Check.]
^[Under "loose talk" a self-deprecating reference to my occasions to both hear and speak in-person with General Eaton.]
[Note that "anachronistic" pertains to the reading of the sources and the top three lines, not to mention the ongoing nature of who's interests are reasonable or to be forced, in the flow of the rationalizing. (Also asterisks and late found sources.)]
[Not exactly breaking, but Ed Schultz notes that Bill O'Reilly believes it was "No Fluke", that Sandra Fluke did not get "in front of that committee" by accident. No, she was rejected by a House Committee and was forced to appear before a Democratic Sub-Committee.]
Thursday, March 25, 2010
Faux Campaign
versus Real concerns.
The last post was so extended I have bumped the last portion up to here:
Anachronistic bracketed and segue.
[If one could raise the level of "sophistication" and be able to cherry pick the rhetoric, one could see that politics is the only method in resolving things, even if you do not feel "responsible" for being in positions of leadership: see Ratigan reference and Hardball below.]
[*** see my call to Boehner's office not to mention what is on their "clean sheet of paper" now.]
[Earlier references to the way media works not to mention this last minute source. And later, Ratigan is a bit of a mix of "targets": see link (here)[UPDATE], from which I have pulled the term "sophistication" (above) from a Tea Party guest, even though the host, Dylan might not understand community organizing perspectives or "responsibilities" in other matters, while Hardball might raise it too well.]
Anachronistic segue.
[I will finish with two issues that could easily be too political, but would love the exact words in law, to explain the "abortion funding" and "mandate" issues relationships to reality versus the rhetoric. But I believe it is a fungible economics issue or state options and commerce clauses relationship to the foot in the door and opening the door to get the TOW out in the form of there being room for improvement from both sides.]
[Hardall, "the reality is" in the "stirring up trouble"(segment) that media focuses more on raising the rhetoric and controversy gets more attention and distracts from issues(my take not guests)] and then covering it is called "whipping it up" when to naught is only more to blame.]
[OK, I can't say I didn't "play with words" especially in the last few bracketed's]
[On the other hand, I would like to reflect the reality that Republicans will not run against reform, just more reform, and note that they must now reverse Valentine, not as in massacre but in sending messages and bills that will get attention, hopefully not from their "clean sheet of paper"(meaning not rerun or failed ideas), but incrementals that will get responded to, run on, and even occasionally get up or down votes, only not necessarily with the kind of bipartisanship and change they hope for.]
*** asterisk applies to last post
The last post was so extended I have bumped the last portion up to here:
Anachronistic bracketed and segue.
[If one could raise the level of "sophistication" and be able to cherry pick the rhetoric, one could see that politics is the only method in resolving things, even if you do not feel "responsible" for being in positions of leadership: see Ratigan reference and Hardball below.]
[*** see my call to Boehner's office not to mention what is on their "clean sheet of paper" now.]
[Earlier references to the way media works not to mention this last minute source. And later, Ratigan is a bit of a mix of "targets": see link (here)[UPDATE], from which I have pulled the term "sophistication" (above) from a Tea Party guest, even though the host, Dylan might not understand community organizing perspectives or "responsibilities" in other matters, while Hardball might raise it too well.]
Anachronistic segue.
[I will finish with two issues that could easily be too political, but would love the exact words in law, to explain the "abortion funding" and "mandate" issues relationships to reality versus the rhetoric. But I believe it is a fungible economics issue or state options and commerce clauses relationship to the foot in the door and opening the door to get the TOW out in the form of there being room for improvement from both sides.]
[Hardall, "the reality is" in the "stirring up trouble"(segment) that media focuses more on raising the rhetoric and controversy gets more attention and distracts from issues(my take not guests)] and then covering it is called "whipping it up" when to naught is only more to blame.]
[OK, I can't say I didn't "play with words" especially in the last few bracketed's]
[On the other hand, I would like to reflect the reality that Republicans will not run against reform, just more reform, and note that they must now reverse Valentine, not as in massacre but in sending messages and bills that will get attention, hopefully not from their "clean sheet of paper"(meaning not rerun or failed ideas), but incrementals that will get responded to, run on, and even occasionally get up or down votes, only not necessarily with the kind of bipartisanship and change they hope for.]
*** asterisk applies to last post
FAUX NEWS!
I'm not in the mood to play with words today.
But it is nice to see the condemnations of violence from some Republicans, while even those that have, don't recognize their part in lighting the fire by their childish complaints and rhetorical run around with the process. Their complaints [***] of not being included and their complaints of unprecedented partisanship should ring hollow, especially in light of the comprehensive compromises and early sacrifices by Democrats for the sake of pragmatism.
The media plays a big part in not better informing the people. FOX is bad enough, but there is so much reactionary programming, that might be valid yet not really enlighten us on the actual basis in fact and correcting rather than repeating. It seems that there is a political ingredient in this as well as a childish back and forth, but also a misunderstanding of the actual difference in taking responsibility* for one's words and blaming others for politicizing their misuse.
My original thoughts were in support of independent filters, or earlier links, and other sources.
Republican Whip Cantor has complaints about the DNC and the D(triple)C using the threats for political gain.** [Boehner see my comment section]
* Andrea Mitchell(MSNBC): today's link to follow (here): now can we not condone whining?(to Cantor not Pelosi)
** The DCCC have now addressed the difference as well as you (the reader) being able to see and decide in the several links, not necessarily in my rhetoric.
Anachronistic bracketed and segue.
[If one could raise the level of "sophistication" and be able to cherry pick the rhetoric, one could see that politics is only method in resolving things even if you do not feel "responsible" for being in positions of leadership: see Ratigan reference and Hardball below.]
[*** see my call to Boehner's office not to mention what is on their "clean sheet of paper" now.]
[Earlier references to the way media works not to mention this last minute source. And Later Ratigan is a bit of a mix of "targets": see link (here)soon, from which I have pulled the term "sophistication" (above) from a Tea Party guest, even though the host, Dylan might not understand community organizing perspectives or "responsibilities" in other matters, while Hardball might raise it too well.]
Anachronistic segue.
[I will finish with two issues that could easily be too political, but would love the exact words in law, to explain the "abortion funding" and "mandate" issues relationships to reality versus the rhetoric. But I believe it is a fungible economics issue or state options and commerce clauses relationship to the foot in the door and opening the door to get the TOW out in the form of there being room for improvement from both sides.]
[Hardall, "the reality is" in the "stirring up trouble"(segment) that media focuses more on raising the rhetoric and controversy gets more attention and distracts from issues(my take not guests)] and then covering it is called "whipping it up" when to naught is only more to blame.]
[OK, I can't say I didn't "play with words" especially in the last few bracketed's]
[On the other hand, I would like to reflect the reality that Republicans will not run against reform, just more reform, and note that they must now reverse Valentine, not as in massacre but in sending messages and bills that will get attention, hopefully not from their "clean sheet of paper"(meaning not rerun or failed ideas), but incrementals that will get responded to, run on, and even occasionally get up or down votes, only not necessarily with the kind of bipartisanship and change they hope for.]
But it is nice to see the condemnations of violence from some Republicans, while even those that have, don't recognize their part in lighting the fire by their childish complaints and rhetorical run around with the process. Their complaints [***] of not being included and their complaints of unprecedented partisanship should ring hollow, especially in light of the comprehensive compromises and early sacrifices by Democrats for the sake of pragmatism.
The media plays a big part in not better informing the people. FOX is bad enough, but there is so much reactionary programming, that might be valid yet not really enlighten us on the actual basis in fact and correcting rather than repeating. It seems that there is a political ingredient in this as well as a childish back and forth, but also a misunderstanding of the actual difference in taking responsibility* for one's words and blaming others for politicizing their misuse.
My original thoughts were in support of independent filters, or earlier links, and other sources.
Republican Whip Cantor has complaints about the DNC and the D(triple)C using the threats for political gain.** [Boehner see my comment section]
* Andrea Mitchell(MSNBC): today's link to follow (here): now can we not condone whining?(to Cantor not Pelosi)
** The DCCC have now addressed the difference as well as you (the reader) being able to see and decide in the several links, not necessarily in my rhetoric.
Anachronistic bracketed and segue.
[If one could raise the level of "sophistication" and be able to cherry pick the rhetoric, one could see that politics is only method in resolving things even if you do not feel "responsible" for being in positions of leadership: see Ratigan reference and Hardball below.]
[*** see my call to Boehner's office not to mention what is on their "clean sheet of paper" now.]
[Earlier references to the way media works not to mention this last minute source. And Later Ratigan is a bit of a mix of "targets": see link (here)soon, from which I have pulled the term "sophistication" (above) from a Tea Party guest, even though the host, Dylan might not understand community organizing perspectives or "responsibilities" in other matters, while Hardball might raise it too well.]
Anachronistic segue.
[I will finish with two issues that could easily be too political, but would love the exact words in law, to explain the "abortion funding" and "mandate" issues relationships to reality versus the rhetoric. But I believe it is a fungible economics issue or state options and commerce clauses relationship to the foot in the door and opening the door to get the TOW out in the form of there being room for improvement from both sides.]
[Hardall, "the reality is" in the "stirring up trouble"(segment) that media focuses more on raising the rhetoric and controversy gets more attention and distracts from issues(my take not guests)] and then covering it is called "whipping it up" when to naught is only more to blame.]
[OK, I can't say I didn't "play with words" especially in the last few bracketed's]
[On the other hand, I would like to reflect the reality that Republicans will not run against reform, just more reform, and note that they must now reverse Valentine, not as in massacre but in sending messages and bills that will get attention, hopefully not from their "clean sheet of paper"(meaning not rerun or failed ideas), but incrementals that will get responded to, run on, and even occasionally get up or down votes, only not necessarily with the kind of bipartisanship and change they hope for.]
Tuesday, January 04, 2011
Oh, what a web...
we weave when first we misattribute. "sic"*
But here(see footnotes) is the tangle thanks to Thom Hartmann.**
*not to mention misquote or evolve
** more tangle (thanks to embedded hyperlinks)
[footnotes: Michael Hudson, Six Minutes, Democracy Now]
[More run off or tangle courtesy of "google"(and Ctrl Find)and Thom Hartmann caller.]
[Speaking timing*** and that was another thread, but spins off of Cato and Henry George, or is it Tucker "George Will" Carlson.]
*** apologies for deep or rather unexpressed and anachronistic footnotes and 4A.
[subset of sovereignty or tangle]
But here(see footnotes) is the tangle thanks to Thom Hartmann.**
*not to mention misquote or evolve
** more tangle (thanks to embedded hyperlinks)
[footnotes: Michael Hudson, Six Minutes, Democracy Now]
[More run off or tangle courtesy of "google"(and Ctrl Find)and Thom Hartmann caller.]
[Speaking timing*** and that was another thread, but spins off of Cato and Henry George, or is it Tucker "George Will" Carlson.]
*** apologies for deep or rather unexpressed and anachronistic footnotes and 4A.
[subset of sovereignty or tangle]
Tuesday, April 26, 2016
Bio ~ engineering.
My first major was Chemical Engineering at USC before a stint in their East Asian Languages and Cultures Department.* After a sabbatical for a number of years, the result was a BA in Liberal Studies at the University of Washington.
[anachronistic writing]**
*removing the impression that I am at all responsible for the hyperlink
** the following are notes in progress akin to side notes on a page being read
NOTES:
Madhyamaka / Dialetheist crazy ~ unmattaka
M-theory of D {?}
Paraconsistent Logic
Paradox ~ ironic ~ rhetorical device
Conceptualization ~/~ falsifies
Nietzsche: tT~ER (eternal recurrence)
Radical Contextualist Semantics ~requires meaning
Statement ~\~ truthmaker (not required)
===================== segue ==========
W-Theory ~ Milo Wolff
Logical Positivism Fusion v. Confluence
Defluence is the struggle[!]
===================== theory?==========
LEVEL TWO NOTES:
W for Wolff AND Wave
Not to mention paradox of M.
Model / Madhyamaka / meaning?
D for Dialetheist, Dimensions and Design
Even rougher notes:
Paraconsistent Wittgenstein
Popper's poker.
=============
Then there is Methane[!]
Big T, and small t: Truth and Tetrahedron
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
* asterisk info only added 5-2-16
Pardon my style.
[anachronistic writing]**
*removing the impression that I am at all responsible for the hyperlink
** the following are notes in progress akin to side notes on a page being read
NOTES:
Madhyamaka / Dialetheist crazy ~ unmattaka
M-theory of D {?}
Paraconsistent Logic
Paradox ~ ironic ~ rhetorical device
Conceptualization ~/~ falsifies
Nietzsche: tT~ER (eternal recurrence)
Radical Contextualist Semantics ~requires meaning
Statement ~\~ truthmaker (not required)
===================== segue ==========
W-Theory ~ Milo Wolff
Logical Positivism Fusion v. Confluence
Defluence is the struggle[!]
===================== theory?==========
LEVEL TWO NOTES:
W for Wolff AND Wave
Not to mention paradox of M.
Model / Madhyamaka / meaning?
D for Dialetheist, Dimensions and Design
Even rougher notes:
Paraconsistent Wittgenstein
Popper's poker.
=============
Then there is Methane[!]
Big T, and small t: Truth and Tetrahedron
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
* asterisk info only added 5-2-16
Pardon my style.
Thursday, July 11, 2002
Friday, November 18, 2011
Friday, February 22, 2013
Future Bubble?
The gist is a pun on Future Shock. I was going to use Future Cushion, but here are three segments that seem to run with that theme.
A Conversation With Al Gore
The Interfaith Amigos On Death And Afterlife *
Michelle Rhee: A "Radical" On Education Reform
*I have only caught portions of the other two.
**(Ctrl F "rubric")
*** anachronistic ironic insert
(The theme? See labels.)***
[Missing Tangent.]
[Ironic Gotcha Journalism. Point Counter-Point(?)**]
[3rd asterisk from the bubble? Three links for which I wish I could track my original train of search, ergo? ergone? KNOT!]
[2-24-13 Rhee Test of Filter?]
A Conversation With Al Gore
The Interfaith Amigos On Death And Afterlife *
Michelle Rhee: A "Radical" On Education Reform
*I have only caught portions of the other two.
**(Ctrl F "rubric")
*** anachronistic ironic insert
(The theme? See labels.)***
[Missing Tangent.]
[Ironic Gotcha Journalism. Point Counter-Point(?)**]
[3rd asterisk from the bubble? Three links for which I wish I could track my original train of search, ergo? ergone? KNOT!]
[2-24-13 Rhee Test of Filter?]
Saturday, January 14, 2012
In the Mean Time...
I will have to stop jam packing so much meaning into my posts.
One point, not that I will start counting, is that the President has put so much on the table, the only place to put more may be under it. Even there may be a tight fit, what with the war on tactics and the given perspectives.
(A- B)
(X-Y-Z)
[speaking of fit ]
Seg way
[emphasis anachronistic: How profit(s)ic? ]
[But an earlier mean time.]
note: C-(s)ic not the original intent of "mean time".
[1-15-12 meaning pun on prophet(sic) slash pro fits, and what fits on the table. Speaking of seg ways, "This Week*" covers a few, while I am still digging into Occupy Seattle.]
*and anachronisms: George Will is surprised (at 42:12) there is not more money in speech/politics "considering the stakes of our politics in allocating wealth and opportunity". And there is a good bit on context.
< previous post >
One point, not that I will start counting, is that the President has put so much on the table, the only place to put more may be under it. Even there may be a tight fit, what with the war on tactics and the given perspectives.
(A- B)
(X-Y-Z)
[speaking of fit ]
Seg way
[emphasis anachronistic: How profit(s)ic? ]
[But an earlier mean time.]
note: C-(s)ic not the original intent of "mean time".
[1-15-12 meaning pun on prophet(sic) slash pro fits, and what fits on the table. Speaking of seg ways, "This Week*" covers a few, while I am still digging into Occupy Seattle.]
*and anachronisms: George Will is surprised (at 42:12) there is not more money in speech/politics "considering the stakes of our politics in allocating wealth and opportunity". And there is a good bit on context.
< previous post >
Tuesday, August 24, 2010
Readying for Trip.
I just found out that posts can not only be post-dated but back-dated. I discovered this after my last three posts. I hereby swear that any editing or anachronistic posting will always be noted, and none have taken place at this time. Post- or back-dating, unless noted, that is.
[Link below will reflect the prior post, go to archives to see full month.]
[posted 8-31-10 around noon]
[Link below will reflect the prior post, go to archives to see full month.]
[posted 8-31-10 around noon]
Wednesday, October 16, 2013
F'n P[!]
an-archy? / tan gent
[!] sarcasm irony punk.
Lede or Ship: Heading
4 M or links in order of insert
(In F able. / punc. / -archy / gent)
War'n Buffet Rule
The P ?
Original Intent: almost lost, Footnotes Page # ?
Gephardt* -House Republicans Changed the Rules to Keep Government Closed
McConnell -Who Controls the House GOP?
Battle. - George W. Bush and the Real Story of the Great Recession**** - (b.s.) Buffet + Warren
Re - Buffet +Metaphor
: - Rule + Field
congre$$ - [War'n Pic/MoveOn]
AM:
Pelosi/
Klobuchar
Gang **
** links/line anachronistic
AM=Andrea Mithell
*** Deep Files Go 4 it.
(buy Jim'n Knee: Faith 'n Progress ?)
[The Cycle? New Hostage on the Table. / Measured Optimism ? ]
[If you don't vote, you won't get your pudding. How can you get your pudding when you won't eat your meet?]
[!] sarcasm irony punk.
Lede or Ship: Heading
4 M or links in order of insert
(In F able. / punc. / -archy / gent)
War'n Buffet Rule
The P ?
Original Intent: almost lost, Footnotes Page # ?
Gephardt* -House Republicans Changed the Rules to Keep Government Closed
McConnell -Who Controls the House GOP?
Battle. - George W. Bush and the Real Story of the Great Recession**** - (b.s.) Buffet + Warren
Re - Buffet +Metaphor
: - Rule + Field
congre$$ - [War'n Pic/MoveOn]
AM:
Pelosi/
Klobuchar
Gang **
** links/line anachronistic
AM=Andrea Mithell
*** Deep Files Go 4 it.
(buy Jim'n Knee: Faith 'n Progress ?)
[The Cycle? New Hostage on the Table. / Measured Optimism ? ]
[If you don't vote, you won't get your pudding. How can you get your pudding when you won't eat your meet?]
Thursday, August 09, 2012
Cut the Cow Pie!
"Open source intelligence" or We Gee Bored?
Or grow the pie?
SEGUE:
Not to pun on CP or PC, but Craven Politics?
I think we found the opposite of PC, or pie cutter.
That's a more eh?
My original intent was to pun or posit the opposite of PC.
Politial Correctness, the Whine of Progress.
But it*** may be parsed* as Craven -v- Politics.
* Romney / Obama
[Foot note or b**PS ?]
**(ad?s) wonting to avoid gee/PS.
*** that posit
[Pardon my dimentional(and anachronistic) asterisks and acronyms, but B**ingo.]
[Note under ac"ron"yms is an anachronism. i.e. late link re: callus political calculus ]
[speaking of anachronism: just turning on Thom Hartmann with Mike Papantonio with caller on justice appointments question of obstruction and my pinnacle of politics]
[Note (2.0) The triangles are not the pie(or pi cutter), they are two dimensional, i.e. a tetrahedron. Speaking of spell check. ]
NOTE: Charts of Sorts.
Or grow the pie?
SEGUE:
Not to pun on CP or PC, but Craven Politics?
I think we found the opposite of PC, or pie cutter.
That's a more eh?
My original intent was to pun or posit the opposite of PC.
Politial Correctness, the Whine of Progress.
But it*** may be parsed* as Craven -v- Politics.
* Romney / Obama
[Foot note or b**PS ?]
**(ad?s) wonting to avoid gee/PS.
*** that posit
[Pardon my dimentional(and anachronistic) asterisks and acronyms, but B**ingo.]
[Note under ac"ron"yms is an anachronism. i.e. late link re: callus political calculus ]
[speaking of anachronism: just turning on Thom Hartmann with Mike Papantonio with caller on justice appointments question of obstruction and my pinnacle of politics]
[Note (2.0) The triangles are not the pie(or pi cutter), they are two dimensional, i.e. a tetrahedron. Speaking of spell check. ]
NOTE: Charts of Sorts.
Thursday, November 01, 2012
In "F"n able?
[FOOTNOTE PAGE FOR NOVEMBER 2012]
Posted Tuesday 11-6-12 as Time Stamped.
Most recent at top.
11-30 (fn) this under construction.
11-23-12 Cautious Black Friday!!!!
Strunk - http://www.bartleby.com/141/strunk.html
(b.s. )^ Charotte + Web
FOOTNOTES: SEPTEMBER 2012
Give us a brake?
^ note yesterday's below correction (b.S.)= spots in this blogSpot
11-22-12 Happy Thanksgiving!!!!!!!
As for footnotes, all are b.S.(blog Spots) in order:
Transition - Nail Meet F--C---[!]
of* - Post Election
Sorts - Hump Day for Journalism
* - FC "Hammer"
anachronistic - Middle C?
caution - Local Journalism
C-VC(viscous^ cycle of sorts)
^(also 11-23-12) re:correction (these 2) are b.s.(blog searches)
11-10-12 That is the ticket![!] 6 S I G M A (OW!)
11-9-12 Stop that! Oh when the Saints...GM'nI(Annie Oakley?WarBucks)
M - F: (a ... o h ?) [Bracket-EDS: U-Tubes ( a, b, c, d ) Speaking of ana chonisms(sic).]
11-6-12 Hump Day for Journalism I should have journaled links as inserted but here goes...not [!]^
^ paradox? (a, b, c, d, e, f, g, h, i ?)
c c? In F able? e, f, ironic? (i.e. Q u b4^^ a,b, ... ?)
^^ Aftermath (a, b, c, d, e, f, g, h, i, j, k, l, m )
For Achronism Sake. (Earlier post moved (and edited)to above the fold.)
[Not to bury the lede: R S N ? (spell check done [!])]
Update: Footnotes & here. (not)
11-6-12 Post Election
11-7-12 Pre-math?^ P.M. (not to pun on After Math, but Pincer Movement)
b.s.= blog search
? = b.s.(almond+joy)
day = facebook AM1090 Norman Goldman 88 Keys!
of = ** see "?"
spirit = Infamy? Not EXACTLY[!]^^
the = b.s.(danger+field)
in = the P.I. Given 2nd term, Obama now facing new urgent task
[and this is only the f'n asterisks]
^after thought (NFRY)
^^ scroll over
Posted Tuesday 11-6-12 as Time Stamped.
Most recent at top.
11-30 (fn) this under construction.
11-23-12 Cautious Black Friday!!!!
Strunk - http://www.bartleby.com/141/strunk.html
(b.s. )^ Charotte + Web
FOOTNOTES: SEPTEMBER 2012
Give us a brake?
^ note yesterday's below correction (b.S.)= spots in this blogSpot
11-22-12 Happy Thanksgiving!!!!!!!
As for footnotes, all are b.S.(blog Spots) in order:
Transition - Nail Meet F--C---[!]
of* - Post Election
Sorts - Hump Day for Journalism
* - FC "Hammer"
anachronistic - Middle C?
caution - Local Journalism
C-VC(viscous^ cycle of sorts)
^(also 11-23-12) re:correction (these 2) are b.s.(blog searches)
11-10-12 That is the ticket![!] 6 S I G M A (OW!)
11-9-12 Stop that! Oh when the Saints...GM'nI(Annie Oakley?WarBucks)
M - F: (a ... o h ?) [Bracket-EDS: U-Tubes ( a, b, c, d ) Speaking of ana chonisms(sic).]
11-6-12 Hump Day for Journalism I should have journaled links as inserted but here goes...not [!]^
^ paradox? (a, b, c, d, e, f, g, h, i ?)
c c? In F able? e, f, ironic? (i.e. Q u b4^^ a,b, ... ?)
^^ Aftermath (a, b, c, d, e, f, g, h, i, j, k, l, m )
For Achronism Sake. (Earlier post moved (and edited)to above the fold.)
[Not to bury the lede: R S N ? (spell check done [!])]
Update: Footnotes & here. (not)
11-6-12 Post Election
11-7-12 Pre-math?^ P.M. (not to pun on After Math, but Pincer Movement)
b.s.= blog search
? = b.s.(almond+joy)
day = facebook AM1090 Norman Goldman 88 Keys!
of = ** see "?"
spirit = Infamy? Not EXACTLY[!]^^
the = b.s.(danger+field)
in = the P.I. Given 2nd term, Obama now facing new urgent task
[and this is only the f'n asterisks]
^after thought (NFRY)
^^ scroll over
Friday, July 12, 2002
i.e. S.E. (vi) edgy
[Post dated 7-12-12]
[7-19-12 Anachronistic Caution * ! ]
Tetra Heed Run?
[7-19-12 Anachronistic Caution * ! ]
Tetra Heed Run?
Speaking of Tetras, not the fish.
(Not to mention NOW, "there, there". Romney Files.)
T for Bane or, E for Cain, Tr for Issa and A for Priebus?
i.e. Raw Money the 5th Elephant or L-lament?
Re: the Tetra Heed Ron, the I Ron Knee of the BOron or MoRon?
Ne BO*Son re:Biden
Re: Paragons v. Paragones
Re: Models v. Meta4s
(Not exactly) Re: Caricatures and Labels
Note that the third image is my original in[!]tent or rather Platonic Tetra Heed Run[!].
[!]= sarcasm/satire paragon/paragone thing
The top two tetrahedron are later labeling, but may also represent a die-caught-o'me,
Wednesday, February 26, 2014
Ghost Busters
Every thing is PC. (Politically Conceptual)
Politics is the 4th* dimention(sic) of nature.(FP1)
* FB posting 2-25 / recreating here 2-26-14
F'n anachronism: i.e. S.E. (vi) edgy
O W.
Politics is the 4th* dimention(sic) of nature.(FP1)
* FB posting 2-25 / recreating here 2-26-14
F'n anachronism: i.e. S.E. (vi) edgy
O W.
[anachronistic construction of this post, the indicated youtube(*) was not fully viewed at insert]
Tan gents ? STOP! These inserts are like judging a blog by my model. I have only viewed one of them. Or in computer lingo GOTO line one. Here I will jump to a missing link, not to practice*** quantum effects***. Dimensions are not dimentions without a perspective. (Un-M-String from Slice of Pi^)**
** hit pause @ 0:13(4M theory?)
Sunday, December 01, 2013
FOOTNOTES PAGE DECEMBER 2013
Begun 12-3-13
12-1-13:(sc) math problem un4m~ulated. (NFRY)
12-2-13(cont.) Too Random... Righty? 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9 (the point ?)
[4 the record : 3 squared? ]
12-3-13: Parallel [!] un-Pink Floyd, He- /^\ , van-NO JOKE, ven-Rough Philosophy, Cry- / Star Chamber Revisited, river- / creek ?
rtd 12-3-13
Retrieved from draft 12-13-13
State Theory <- heading // lede -> and duality// trinity/body Headings
and^ Leadership*. (dynamics)
^ of/or 8: Snooze/Dream(4,6) *prof(it)C? (7,8) Bane or Right? [Not to blog both ends against the middle.]
Don’t celebrate yet!: Why Boehner won’t really ditch the right-wing nutjobs. / The Christian right wants civilization to collapse / (3/5) Head ~ Lead Paul Krugman: The GOP’s austerity agenda is winning / My critics have “income envy”: Ed Schultz unloads after backlash to his union quote
Dual / nd: When will the media learn? Conservatives are not “centrists”! / 3 essential (and ignored) questions about Detroit’s bankruptcy Try Ad of Caution? (not fully read yet) (anachronistic construction) (duel conflation)~ (bc: bubble critics) OW Hegel ~ Liebniz [!]
RTD
12-23-13 (4) A. Rubric's Cube and Rhetorical Realmifications., B. What's good for the goose? Goose the gander! c. Snooze Alarm d. Tony Baloney e. WWW Wisconsin Lesson? f. We Need Ed g, What's good for the goose...
12-27-13
12-28-13 1 Was Wittgenstein Right? or behind [?^] 4, 5, 6, 7, 8 ... 9 // 10 / 11
^ insert a - h
12-29-13 - Original 5 links. A. Frank O File? B. Pi cAP Delta rOW(USC) C. 1. Inverse Reality?, 2.(i), 3. Fair and Balanced..., D. Wittgenstein , E. Re-Mix ///
12-30 F.rough- 1. Punderous Ponderings , 2. State of Politics , 3. A Revolution? 4.Un-Exceptionalism 5. , G.notes^ -1. 2.Heuristic
Concurrence and 3.My
Respects to Those who Celebrate. (re-search*) ,
H.math^^ - 1. Too
Random... , 2., 3.Bury
the lede?, 4. ROW
MAN #Sign [Numeral (i)] . *(under the case of not fully read yet, but back to math... why now 16? too cubed by two? Speculation that the 5th perspective is from apart too pun? The three-body problem regards intitial circumstances from within or without. R 1st 3 models different than recently added. The pow#r of i(V)?
12-1-13:(sc) math problem un4m~ulated. (NFRY)
12-2-13(cont.) Too Random... Righty? 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9 (the point ?)
[4 the record : 3 squared? ]
12-3-13: Parallel [!] un-Pink Floyd, He- /^\ , van-NO JOKE, ven-Rough Philosophy, Cry- / Star Chamber Revisited, river- / creek ?
rtd 12-3-13
Retrieved from draft 12-13-13
State Theory <- heading // lede -> and duality
Don’t celebrate yet!: Why Boehner won’t really ditch the right-wing nutjobs. / The Christian right wants civilization to collapse / (3/5) Head ~ Lead Paul Krugman: The GOP’s austerity agenda is winning / My critics have “income envy”: Ed Schultz unloads after backlash to his union quote
Dual / nd: When will the media learn? Conservatives are not “centrists”! / 3 essential (and ignored) questions about Detroit’s bankruptcy Try Ad of Caution? (not fully read yet) (anachronistic construction) (duel conflation)~ (bc: bubble critics) OW Hegel ~ Liebniz [!]
RTD
12-23-13 (4) A. Rubric's Cube and Rhetorical Realmifications., B. What's good for the goose? Goose the gander! c. Snooze Alarm d. Tony Baloney e. WWW Wisconsin Lesson? f. We Need Ed g, What's good for the goose...
12-27-13
12-28-13 1 Was Wittgenstein Right? or behind [?
12-29-13 - Original 5 links. A. Frank O File? B. Pi cAP Delta rOW(USC) C. 1. Inverse Reality?, 2.(i), 3. Fair and Balanced..., D. Wittgenstein , E. Re-Mix ///
12-30 F.rough- 1. Punderous Ponderings , 2. State of Politics , 3. A Revolution? 4.Un-Exceptionalism 5. , G.notes
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)